Mic Wright is a journalist specialising in technology, music and popular culture. He lives in Dublin.

What the Samsung 'hijack' tells us about the complicity between tech journalists and PR

Somewhere in the email archives of a PR firm that worked for Samsung in the 2007, there is a message branding me as “uncooperative”. It also calls the rest of the British journalists on the the international press trip I attended “more interested in the bar than the trip’s content”. Brilliantly, the internal report was "accidentally" forwarded to me after our return. It’s a great example of the cultural disconnect between the Korean firm and the Western journalists and bloggers it often encounters.

As news editor at the consumer technology bible, Stuff, opportunities for me to attend trips to get a behind-the-scenes view of what companies were working on were common. With editorial budgets stretched, the idea of the publishing company paying for visits to the major trade conferences such as IFA in Berlin and CES in Las Vegas was laughable.

The fateful Samsung trip was a week-long jag in Seoul during which the company worked hard to persuade the tech press that its latest smartphone, the F700, was easily a match for the newly unveiled iPhone. Its representatives also acted offended when anyone mentioned the Apple product. This was before Samsung experienced what one of its own executives called “a crisis of design” and began to study Apple’s moves in a calculated attempt to catch up.

Some journalists from other European countries, notably the suited and booted Germans and a gaggle of camera-toting folk from the former Eastern bloc, were happy to visit identical factory after identical factory and listen to executives explain the company’s brilliance. Unsurprisingly the Brits were not, and after realising that there would be no exclusive news we became more enamoured of the hotel’s cheesy jazz bar.

The experience of being made to traipse from one Samsung set piece to the next came to mind again this week when I read The Next Web’s story about India tech bloggers who found themselves effectively held hostage in Berlin. The pair were invited by Samsung to attend the IFA conference through a programme called Samsung Mobilers – but there were unexpected conditions.

Mobilers is a scheme run by Samsung in a number of countries. It rewards bloggers with points for writing posts on topics determined by the company and, in true Price Is Right-style, points mean prizes. In the case of the IFA jaunt, Clinton Jeff and another, unnamed Indian blogger were told Samsung would pay for their flights, accommodation and expenses.

Jeff, who has been brave in his willingness to be named, claims Samsung gave him the option to attend the show as a reporter or a promoter. He says he insisted that he would only accept the offer as a reporter and would not allow himself to be presented as a brand advocate for Samsung. It’s understood that his unnamed compatriot stressed the same conditions.

However, when the pair arrived in Berlin they were issued with uniforms and told they were expected to staff Samsung’s booths showing new devices to guests and the press. Their protests resulted in a shocking response from Samsung – support was withdrawn and their original return flights were cancelled.

Jeff, who has written extensively about Nokia, was saved by the Finnish company, which clearly knows a positive PR story when it sees one. It has paid for the pair’s return flights and hotels, allowing them to report on the rest of the IFA events without conditions.

In a statement, Samsung said:

Samsung Mobilers is a voluntary community of active Samsung mobile device users, who are offered the opportunity to participate in our marketing events across the world. At these events, all activities they undertake are on a voluntary basis. No activities are forced upon them.

We regret there was a misunderstanding between the Samsung Mobilers coordinators and the relevant blogger, as we understand he was not sufficiently briefed on the nature of Samsung Mobilers' activities at IFA 2012. We have been attempting to get in touch with him. We respect the independence of bloggers to publish their own stories.

However, in a follow-up story, The Next Web published Samsung’s email to Jeff which reveals a rather more contrite attitude: “I would like to reach out to you and deeply apologise to you for your experience in Berlin at IFA. We put you through undue hardship and we are trying to rectify the situation.”

Still, that’s a classic PR approach: never admit fault in public, only express regret about the unfortunate “confusion” and then quietly fire someone hoping that it will all go away. But the tale of the mistreated Indian bloggers is by no means a one-off. All product-led journalism is about access, whether journalists and bloggers take flights and hospitality or not, they’re complicit.

The oft-expressed view that companies, particularly Apple, pay for coverage from journalists is way off the mark. In Apple’s case it doesn’t have to since readers are so interested in hearing about new products from Cupertino, whether they want to slag them or sing their praises. It was once said that no one ever got fired for buying IBM and in tech journalism, no one ever got fired for writing about Apple.

While journalists at mainstream outlets are not paid by companies, they are in a position where they have to work closely with them to get the scoops and first looks they need to stay ahead. Reviewers tread a tricky line – they must be critical and honest to keep the confidence of their readers but can, if they hammer a particular brand too hard, find themselves left out in the cold, unable to get access to the review units they need to do their job.

Access is the currency in so many areas of journalism outside of hard news. Celebrity interviewers live and die on access and it really is the same for technology writers who cover new products. Of course there are some publications, such as Consumer Reports in the US, that purchase every product they review and therefore avoid the need to keep companies onside, but speed is also important now. In the battle for views, getting hold of a new phone or tablet before their rivals is a major advantage.

There is also a major moral gulf between the US and UK on the issue. In America, taking hospitality from firms you cover or even allowing them to pay for your air fare is seriously frowned upon. In the aftermath of the Indian blogger story, the American freelance journalist, Glenn Fleishman, who contributes to MacWorld and the Economist, tweeted:

Junkets aren’t appropriate for anyone who claims to engage in objective journalism, tech or otherwise. Accept money from a company in order to cover something they’re doing, and there’s no amount of soap to wash away the smell that’s something terribly wrong.

It’s hard to disagree with his sentiments but they come from someone who has been able to draw on the resources of organisations that are willing to pay for their writers to attend conferences and launch events. The sad fact is that most tech writers, both those with the badge of a big media organisation and solo bloggers, are hamstrung by small budgets.

In general, the tech companies exercise soft power. Rather than directly stating that they expect coverage or going as far as Samsung did in attempting to sign up shills, they simply freeze out those outlets that don’t follow the script. And for markets like India, where bloggers are even more unlikely to have deep-pocketed publishers, that pressure is much easier to apply.

Bloggers in both the UK and the US are obliged by law to reveal when they are writing about products from businesses with whom they have a commercial relationship, but many do not. Those in the UK may find the Enterprise Act 2002 and Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 instructive reading. It behoves readers to be very wary of writers who present breathless reviews of products or brands. There’s usually something beyond enthusiasm at work.

Product-focused journalism is a compromised world. Even those voices that seem to be utterly outspoken and even renegade are nothing of the sort. Gizmodo, the petulant punk face of technology blogging, turned viciously on Apple only after it was shut out of the company's briefings when it took possession of a stolen iPhone. Before that cataclysm, Gizmodo toed the line like the rest and even now it’s careful to nuzzle up to the line but not cross it when it comes to the big tech names it needs to keep the lights on.

When someone strays from that plan, whether its British journalists getting bored of endless factory tours or Indian bloggers refusing to become booth buddies, the the complicity around almost every other interaction between PR and the tech press is revealed. The product-led brand of tech journalism is not about objective reporting – it’s about access to shiny new objects.